Re: [News] Good Reviews of the New gOS 2.0 - Ubuntu

This is a discussion on Re: [News] Good Reviews of the New gOS 2.0 - Ubuntu ; On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 22:33:07 -0400, DFS wrote: > Roy Schestowitz wrote: >> Review : gOS 2.0 Beta >> >> ,----[ Quote ] >>> Conclusion : gOS is an extremely usable and user friendly Linux >>> distribution. > > ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Re: [News] Good Reviews of the New gOS 2.0

  1. Re: [News] Good Reviews of the New gOS 2.0

    On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 22:33:07 -0400, DFS wrote:

    > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >> Review : gOS 2.0 Beta
    >>
    >> ,----[ Quote ]
    >>> Conclusion : gOS is an extremely usable and user friendly Linux
    >>> distribution.

    >
    >
    > "After i had changed the language of the system, some programs did not work.
    > they (etc media player) crash and close"
    > 4/14/08 at 06:45:49 am
    > http://cafelinux.org/gosforum/index....sg2083#msg2083
    >
    >
    > "After compiz working, the top panel disappeared. You can click on the
    > buttons but they are invisible."
    > 4/14/08 at 06:43:10 am
    > http://cafelinux.org/gosforum/index....icseen#msg2082
    >
    >
    > "Suspend and hibernate both failed for my install of gOS 2.0.0 beta for my
    > hp dv6113us notebook."
    > http://cafelinux.org/gosforum/index....28&topic=309.0
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >>> It actually brings much needed breath of fresh air to
    >>> stagnant desktop Linux market (Dominated by Ubuntu and other
    >>> distribution which are pretty similar with nothing radically
    >>> different) .

    >
    > Ubuntu is different: it seems to dominate in the freezing up department.
    >
    >
    >
    >>> Overall gOS is highly impressive

    >
    > LMAO!
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >> ,----[ Quote ]
    >>> With Vista being pushed hard at the
    >>> moment, more and more Microsoft customers are becoming fed up with
    >>> Windows and looking for an alternative.

    >
    > Wait 'till they get a load of gOS.
    >
    >
    >
    >>> Linux is ready to take over
    >>> the desktop market now,

    >
    > How is Linux going to take over a market that laughs at it?
    >
    > And according to Linux "advocates" it was ready 10 years ago, and 5 years
    > ago, and 1 year ago - what's the holdup?
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >>> and a distribution like gOS, properly
    >>> advertised and supported may soon take it there.

    >
    > yawwwwwwwwwnnnnnnnnnnnnn......
    >
    >
    >
    >> gOS Reloaded 2.0 Beta -- Is Good OS really good enough to blast off?

    >
    > No. Not even close.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >> Gosh, gOS is good

    >
    > Actually, it's not.


    It's complete crapware.........

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  2. Re: [News] Good Reviews of the New gOS 2.0

    > >> Gosh, gOS is good
    > > Actually, it's not.

    > It's complete crapware........


    You seem to quite vocal on the subject of gOS - can give us an
    in-depth critique about where you think it goes wrong ?


  3. Re: [News] Good Reviews of the New gOS 2.0

    On 2008-04-15, Colin Wilson wrote:
    >> >> Gosh, gOS is good
    >> > Actually, it's not.

    >> It's complete crapware........

    >
    > You seem to quite vocal on the subject of gOS - can give us an
    > in-depth critique about where you think it goes wrong ?
    >


    Colin, what do you think about

    [Bug 191889] Re: Firefox's new "Offline Mode" feature cannot properly

    it causes quite a consternation amongst Hardy beta users, myself
    included. Any idea if you guys have any plans to address it?

    i

  4. Re: [News] Good Reviews of the New gOS 2.0

    > Colin, what do you think about
    > [Bug 191889] Re: Firefox's new "Offline Mode" feature cannot properly
    > it causes quite a consternation amongst Hardy beta users, myself
    > included. Any idea if you guys have any plans to address it?


    I'm not a developer myself, but it sounds like it's an issue with
    Firefox 3 in particular, as it sounds like Firefox 2 worked as it
    should.

    It might be that while it's still in beta, they're working on the
    issue.

  5. Re: [News] Good Reviews of the New gOS 2.0


    "Ignoramus6985" wrote in message
    news:6N2dnZjCrdIMtJjVnZ2dnUVZ_rjinZ2d@giganews.com ...
    > On 2008-04-15, Colin Wilson
    > wrote:
    >>> >> Gosh, gOS is good
    >>> > Actually, it's not.
    >>> It's complete crapware........

    >>
    >> You seem to quite vocal on the subject of gOS - can give us an
    >> in-depth critique about where you think it goes wrong ?
    >>

    >
    > Colin, what do you think about
    >
    > [Bug 191889] Re: Firefox's new "Offline Mode" feature cannot properly
    >
    > it causes quite a consternation amongst Hardy beta users, myself
    > included. Any idea if you guys have any plans to address it?
    >
    > i


    Can you tell me how that affects gOS? That I've seen, there is nothing
    "hardy" about gOS.

    Thanks

    Ed




  6. Re: [News] Good Reviews of the New gOS 2.0

    > Can you tell me how that affects gOS? That I've seen, there is nothing
    > "hardy" about gOS.


    Indded - it's based on Gutsy.

    "gOS is powered by Ubuntu 7.10 and E17" is shown in the "About gOS"
    dialogue box

  7. Re: [News] Good Reviews of the New gOS 2.0

    > Can you tell me how that affects gOS? That I've seen, there is nothing
    > "hardy" about gOS.


    Ahh, my previous answer referred to the gOS2 beta, I didn't realise a
    new version was released a few days ago - downloading it now !

  8. Re: [News] Good Reviews of the New gOS 2.0


    "Colin Wilson" wrote
    in message news:MPG.226f44d992230596989699@news.motzarella.or g...
    >> Can you tell me how that affects gOS? That I've seen, there is nothing
    >> "hardy" about gOS.

    >
    > Ahh, my previous answer referred to the gOS2 beta, I didn't realise a
    > new version was released a few days ago - downloading it now !


    Thanks... I've only tried the previous (and never even opened the "About
    gOS" box.) I knew it was a fork but I'm still not sure how related a "fork"
    is to it's er... parent. Is "parent" the correct term for it?

    I'm still on the fence on my Cloudbook vs. eee decision. I'll probably go
    eee since there are already 3 in the house.

    Ed



  9. Re: [News] Good Reviews of the New gOS 2.0

    > I knew it was a fork but I'm still not sure how related a "fork"
    > is to it's er... parent. Is "parent" the correct term for it?


    The phrase "b*stard child" springs to mind, but that's probably a
    little unfair :-p

    (booting it up in VirtualBox right now !)

  10. Re: [News] Good Reviews of the New gOS 2.0

    > (booting it up in VirtualBox right now !)

    OK, that failed... doesn't seem to like Vbox set to 320Mb memory and
    32Mb video, although it could be an issue with the way it handles
    video - I get a rather spiffy looking planet as a backdrop, but an
    error to do with one of the gfx subsystems responses...

    Just seem to be having trouble replicating the problem for some reason
    :-}

  11. Re: [News] Good Reviews of the New gOS 2.0

    On 2008-04-15, Colin Wilson wrote:
    >> Colin, what do you think about
    >> [Bug 191889] Re: Firefox's new "Offline Mode" feature cannot properly
    >> it causes quite a consternation amongst Hardy beta users, myself
    >> included. Any idea if you guys have any plans to address it?

    >
    > I'm not a developer myself, but it sounds like it's an issue with
    > Firefox 3 in particular, as it sounds like Firefox 2 worked as it
    > should.
    >
    > It might be that while it's still in beta, they're working on the
    > issue.


    Colin, to give you a brief synopsis, the issue is that Firefox, Pidgin
    etc rely on dbus and NetworkManager to check if they are
    online. NetworkManager does not work with a lot of dialup and cell
    phone and wireless broadband modems and if we dial on our own from
    command line. Thus it thinks that the computer is offline (despite having
    an obvious default route etc).

    That causes all these programs to start in offline mode, which is realy
    annoying.

    I had to downgrade to firefox-2 due to this.

    i

  12. Re: [News] Good Reviews of the New gOS 2.0

    ____/ Ignoramus15568 on Wednesday 16 April 2008 01:13 : \____

    > On 2008-04-15, Colin Wilson
    > wrote:
    >>> Colin, what do you think about
    >>> [Bug 191889] Re: Firefox's new "Offline Mode" feature cannot properly
    >>> it causes quite a consternation amongst Hardy beta users, myself
    >>> included. Any idea if you guys have any plans to address it?

    >>
    >> I'm not a developer myself, but it sounds like it's an issue with
    >> Firefox 3 in particular, as it sounds like Firefox 2 worked as it
    >> should.
    >>
    >> It might be that while it's still in beta, they're working on the
    >> issue.

    >
    > Colin, to give you a brief synopsis, the issue is that Firefox, Pidgin
    > etc rely on dbus and NetworkManager to check if they are
    > online. NetworkManager does not work with a lot of dialup and cell
    > phone and wireless broadband modems and if we dial on our own from
    > command line. Thus it thinks that the computer is offline (despite having
    > an obvious default route etc).
    >
    > That causes all these programs to start in offline mode, which is realy
    > annoying.
    >
    > I had to downgrade to firefox-2 due to this.


    Firefox 3.0 is still a couple of months away. Use in a production-type
    environment at own risk... or file a bug report.

    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | INQredible Hacktivism
    http://Schestowitz.com | Free as in Free Beer | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    Cpu(s): 23.1%us, 3.5%sy, 1.0%ni, 68.3%id, 3.7%wa, 0.2%hi, 0.1%si, 0.0%st
    http://iuron.com - semantic engine to gather information

  13. Re: [News] Good Reviews of the New gOS 2.0

    On 2008-04-16, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    > ____/ Ignoramus15568 on Wednesday 16 April 2008 01:13 : \____
    >
    >> On 2008-04-15, Colin Wilson
    >> wrote:
    >>>> Colin, what do you think about
    >>>> [Bug 191889] Re: Firefox's new "Offline Mode" feature cannot properly
    >>>> it causes quite a consternation amongst Hardy beta users, myself
    >>>> included. Any idea if you guys have any plans to address it?
    >>>
    >>> I'm not a developer myself, but it sounds like it's an issue with
    >>> Firefox 3 in particular, as it sounds like Firefox 2 worked as it
    >>> should.
    >>>
    >>> It might be that while it's still in beta, they're working on the
    >>> issue.

    >>
    >> Colin, to give you a brief synopsis, the issue is that Firefox, Pidgin
    >> etc rely on dbus and NetworkManager to check if they are
    >> online. NetworkManager does not work with a lot of dialup and cell
    >> phone and wireless broadband modems and if we dial on our own from
    >> command line. Thus it thinks that the computer is offline (despite having
    >> an obvious default route etc).
    >>
    >> That causes all these programs to start in offline mode, which is realy
    >> annoying.
    >>
    >> I had to downgrade to firefox-2 due to this.

    >
    > Firefox 3.0 is still a couple of months away. Use in a production-type
    > environment at own risk... or file a bug report.
    >


    I think that Firefox 3 is not at fault here, what is at fault is the
    method of determining offline status/

    i

  14. Re: [News] Good Reviews of the New gOS 2.0

    ____/ Ignoramus15568 on Wednesday 16 April 2008 04:53 : \____

    > On 2008-04-16, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >> ____/ Ignoramus15568 on Wednesday 16 April 2008 01:13 : \____
    >>
    >>> On 2008-04-15, Colin Wilson
    >>> wrote:
    >>>>> Colin, what do you think about
    >>>>> [Bug 191889] Re: Firefox's new "Offline Mode" feature cannot properly
    >>>>> it causes quite a consternation amongst Hardy beta users, myself
    >>>>> included. Any idea if you guys have any plans to address it?
    >>>>
    >>>> I'm not a developer myself, but it sounds like it's an issue with
    >>>> Firefox 3 in particular, as it sounds like Firefox 2 worked as it
    >>>> should.
    >>>>
    >>>> It might be that while it's still in beta, they're working on the
    >>>> issue.
    >>>
    >>> Colin, to give you a brief synopsis, the issue is that Firefox, Pidgin
    >>> etc rely on dbus and NetworkManager to check if they are
    >>> online. NetworkManager does not work with a lot of dialup and cell
    >>> phone and wireless broadband modems and if we dial on our own from
    >>> command line. Thus it thinks that the computer is offline (despite having
    >>> an obvious default route etc).
    >>>
    >>> That causes all these programs to start in offline mode, which is realy
    >>> annoying.
    >>>
    >>> I had to downgrade to firefox-2 due to this.

    >>
    >> Firefox 3.0 is still a couple of months away. Use in a production-type
    >> environment at own risk... or file a bug report.
    >>

    >
    > I think that Firefox 3 is not at fault here, what is at fault is the
    > method of determining offline status/


    In Thunderbird and Firefox, which I use regularly enough to know, I believe
    on/offline is determined by the state of the application as instructed by the
    user... not the O/S layer informing the application about connection status.
    This may have changed in future versions, but I doubt it.

    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | Useless fact: A dragonfly only lives for one day
    http://Schestowitz.com | GNU is Not UNIX | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    roy pts/2 cg093a.halls.man Tue Apr 15 07:26 still logged in
    http://iuron.com - proposing a non-profit search engine

  15. Re: [News] Good Reviews of the New gOS 2.0

    Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:

    > In Thunderbird and Firefox, which I use regularly enough to know, I
    > believe on/offline is determined by the state of the application as
    > instructed by the user... not the O/S layer informing the application
    > about connection status. This may have changed in future versions,
    > but I doubt it.


    This specific flag is "offline.startup_state" (in about:config, or
    manually edit prefs.js). Mine's set to "2", which I guess means always
    start up on-line.

    There's also a dynamic variable "network.online" which is updated by the
    Necko transport layer, which I assume checks for an active network to
    determine its status. It's behaviour may have changed in FF3.

    http://www.mozilla.org/quality/netwo.../netprefs.html

    --
    K.
    http://slated.org

    ..----
    | 'When it comes to knowledge, "ownership" just doesn't make sense'
    | ~ Cory Doctorow, The Guardian. http://tinyurl.com/22bgx8
    `----

    Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.23.8-63.fc8
    17:08:16 up 117 days, 13:44, 4 users, load average: 0.01, 0.04, 0.00

  16. Re: [News] Good Reviews of the New gOS 2.0

    On 2008-04-16, Homer wrote:
    > Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
    >
    >> In Thunderbird and Firefox, which I use regularly enough to know, I
    >> believe on/offline is determined by the state of the application as
    >> instructed by the user... not the O/S layer informing the application
    >> about connection status. This may have changed in future versions,
    >> but I doubt it.

    >
    > This specific flag is "offline.startup_state" (in about:config, or
    > manually edit prefs.js). Mine's set to "2", which I guess means always
    > start up on-line.
    >
    > There's also a dynamic variable "network.online" which is updated by the
    > Necko transport layer, which I assume checks for an active network to
    > determine its status. It's behaviour may have changed in FF3.
    >
    > http://www.mozilla.org/quality/netwo.../netprefs.html
    >


    Thanks. I will try it on the train tonight.

    i

+ Reply to Thread